Slashdot Mirror
California Moves To Block Texas' Textbook Changes
eldavojohn writes "Yesterday the Texas textbook controversy was reported internationally but the news today heats up the debate as California, a state on the other side of the political spectrum, introduces legislation that would block these textbook changes inside California. Democrat Senator Leland Yee (you may know him as a senator often tackling ESRB ratings on video games) introduced SB1451, which would require California's school board to review books for any of Texas' changes and block the material if any such are found. The bill's text alleges that said changes would be 'a sharp departure from widely accepted historical teachings' and 'a threat to the apolitical nature of public school governance and academic content standards in California.'"
If you can't fight them... Put a fence around and let them devolve in peace.
"apolitical nature of public school governance"
Say what?
Is he seriously implying that current curricula was set with political blinders on. Not that I agree with the slant Texas has put on history, but to imply that the current histories taught do not have one is disingenuous.
"a threat to the apolitical nature of public school governance and academic content standards in California."
"apolitical"? Huh?
There's no such thing in an organization that exist solely via government, aka "public schools".
Because something that is widely accepted is always true.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
"I'm not American" That's not very patriotic of you. Our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves right now!
recall our ambassador to Texas.
If the liberals that are ruining the USA are fighting the conservatives that are ruining the USA then the rest of us can have some peace and quiet for a while.
Brrring...hello Texas? This is California...umm...you're black. I offer into evidence the California teacher spouting off a few days ago about how California is "stolen occupied Mexico". Guess that guy never heard about the Mexican American War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican%E2%80%93American_War) which Mexico lost. Apolitical? How about historically accurate? Try that for once.
Texans seem to want it one particular way. Thats fine, they can vote and agree to have it that way.
California doesn't want it that way. THATS FINE, they can vote and agree to have it THEIR way.
Thats the advantage of having state laws rather than federal laws for things like this. People can dictate how THEIR community is ran and thats perfectly fine within reason. While you and I may not agree with it, the majority of Texans do so let them do what they want and stop trying to push your agenda on to them.
If you don't like it, live somewhere else or get enough Texans to agree with you to change the law.
One of America's biggest problems is everyone in it thinking their way is the only way and that everyone else in America should do and act the same way.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Textbooks should assumedly be 'politically neutral'. Who decides what is neutral? Isn't that an incredibly powerful position politically, because all deviations from neutrality will be erased by default unless enormous prestige in the face of strong opposition to partisanship is faced down?
One of the changes that was found non-neutral is that the textbooks will include a 'suggestion' that the McCarthy anti-communist policies 'may' have been justified. Should textbooks similarly not include what may be interpreted as a 'suggestion' that the French Revolution 'may' have been justified (e.g. "lots of people were poor and poor people tend to get upset when others are extremely rich" - a pure bona fide justification for the bloodbath)? Or what may be seen as 'suggestions' that the Soviet or Maoist uprisings 'may' have been justified? If there are _existing_ suggestions of this kind, is it OK for Texas to remove them?
Should they include a 'suggestion' that hatred against the US and violence against US citizens in the Middle East 'may' be justified? Or is this banned already?
History education as a whole is terrible and really all too often is used to teach an agenda.
A great example is the Atomic bombing of Japan. A good friend of mine went to a very good college. When she told me about what she was taught about WWII was was shocked.
It seems that the the US was racist and that is why we nuked Japan and that we treated the Germans with much more respect.
When I asked her about the Batan death march she had never heard of it.
When I asked her about the rape of Nanking. She had never heard of such a thing.
When I asked her about the threats to kill all the POWs in Japan if the US invaded she never heard of that.
But she did tell me that they told here Japan was willing to surrender before we dropped the bomb if we would have promised them that they could keep their emperor. "BTW that is a myth. The goal of negotiations was to prevent the occupation of Japan and not to just preserve the status of the Emperor".
It doesn't matter it is all slanted.
The teacher brought in a old woman that was a child when the bomb was dropped... That will help bring balance.
Truth is that with the exception of Japan and Germany in WWII the villains tended to not be as bad as history teaches and the heroes then to not be as pure. Notice that I left Italy out. Frankly they where just your average tin pot dictatorship and not really all that evil. The just fell in with a bad crowd. Oh and yes Stalin was just as bad as history says. Heck the only reason that Germany really lost on the Russian front was because Hitler was the on person on the planet that treated the Russians worse that Stalin did!
I get the feeling that all too often History is taught as a way to make use feel superior to those that went before us. Frankly that is a dangerous and stupid thing to do.
I would love to see a history class about the atomic bombing where they actually tried to teach the students to understand why Truman thought dropping the bomb was a good idea. What information he had and what was going on at the time.
Maybe then we could actually start learning form history instead twisting it to make us feel so much more enlightened than the historical figures from that past.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Thats a really freaking ignorant statement.
You think everyone should see it your way. Unfortunatly you are a minority of one because no one else sees it exactly your way. Everyone has their own views and opinions.
If Texans have a way they want to do something, LET THEM, and don't live there if you don't like it.
Wow ... just fucking WOW ... there is absolutely nothing correct about any part of that entire statement. Get a clue.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Yes, textbooks are dangerously biased so lets set the elementary aged kids loose to learn everything from the internet. Seriously? There's so much noise that gets thrown around the web that most adults have trouble identifying what is and isn't real (if I had a dollar for every email I get telling me that cleaner X is going to kill my pets and babies I wouldn't have to worry about the mortgage). Letting someone run free to learn on the internet is like saying "go find information that you agree with", that's all that 99% of people are ever going to do.
I realize you specifically call out primary sources, but do you really think that such sources aren't just as politically bent as modern sources. I guarantee you that you can find primary sources that describe the Kent State incident as everything from a horrible accident, to an violent demonstration, to murder of innocent college students. There's no way that a young kid is going to be able to sift through it and find the facts of the situation, that's why we pay professional historians to gather the facts in the first place.
Well, technically the part about him being dumbed down is still correct. :-)
The next time a southern state wants to secede from the union.... LET THEM!!!!!!!!
'Cause we always wanted a third world country comprised of gun-toting Rednecks led by religious whackjobs right on our border.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Hopefully he doesn't have another law for dealing with people who misspell his name.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Yeah, that's why that San Francisco school sent home the students for wearing American Flags on Cinco De Mayo. Completely apolitical.
that joke map showing canada absorbing the west coast and the east coat down to maryland, calling the south and the middle "jesusland" was a funny internet meme at one time, but as of late, is looking more like a serious cause
i admire canada's healthcare, it's sober banking rules, it's pragmatic international policies. and meanwhile i am stuck in this country with these fucking morons in the south ruining this country with neocon presidents, religious fundamentalism and ignorant libertarian wish fulfillment fantasies of the market just taking care of itself with unicorns and rainbows
give the south and the plains their assault guns and their abstinence education leading to lots more pregnant teens and their creationism denying leading to ignorance of basic science, and let them sink into the third world hellhole they so fervently desire to be
canada: give them alberta for the northeast usa, pretty please?
i honestly feel more affinity with canadians, in terms of morality and values, then i do with faux news zombified morons in the lower regions of my own country
i seriously, seriously have a major problem with some of my own countrymen who live in some sort of medieval parallel universe of prideful ignorance
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Yeah! Because Detroit is kicking some serious ass right now.
Detroit's a state now?
'Cause we always wanted a third world country comprised of gun-toting Rednecks led by religious whackjobs right on our border.
"Now you know how we feel." -Random Canadian dude
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
"It's an urban myth, especially in this digital age we live in, when content can be tailored and customized for individual states and school districts," said Jay Diskey, executive director of the schools division of the Association of American Publishers.
--
Three companies are responsible for about 75 percent of the country's K-12 textbooks, Diskey estimated. Representatives for two of them--Houghton Mifflin Harcourt and McGraw-Hill--on Friday referred inquiries from The Associated Press to Diskey. The third, Pearson Education Inc., did not respond to a request for comment.
--
For now, California's curriculum will not be subject to any modifications, Texas-influenced or otherwise. Last July, the Legislature suspended until 2013 the statewide adoption of new educational materials to give cash-strapped districts a break from buying new textbooks.
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
> By forcing banks and lenders to loan money to people without the ability to pay it back or face stiff penalties.
That's just stupid racist nonsense.
All the feds did was to outlaw redlining. Banks were simply forced to use the same standards regardless of the skin color of the applicant.
The fact that banks chose to throw out well established standards is another matter. No penalty is going to force a bank to write bad paper. The only thing that will encourage a bank to write bad paper is if they can sell it to some other sucker.
Banks that did not resell loans did not make bad loans.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
In Peru, in the 80s, there was a group of maoist nutjobs called the "Shining Path," who vowed, among other things, to surround the cities from the countryside. What they were and are is a rural terrorist organization.
I've traveled in rural Texas recently. What you have there are a lot of poor, uneducated, disenfranchised white people sporting racist tatoos buying knives and swords at stands by the side of the road. The gun trade is a bit more private but still quite active. The textbook changes just reflect a wider change in worldview in the rural south. What they are poised to do are to become the next generation of terrorist nutjobs fobbing bombs at wealthier people, mostly in cities. They're just waiting for the next corn-pone Hitler, which the networks that gave us the Becks and Palins of the world will be all too happy to provide.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Nonsense, the primary responsibility for the irresponsibility in home loans is...the American people. They signed papers they didn't understand and reveled in being ignorant, they bought houses they could not afford, they bought second houses, they took out the equity in their current dwelling, they did everything they could think of to make a buck before the game of economic musical chairs stopped. Now that they got caught holding the bag, they are looking for scapegoats.
That doesn't mean they were not enabled by the federal gov. and by Wall Street securitizing loans and thus removing the connection between risk and collateral. They were ill-served by builders, realtors, local banks, mortgage companies, rating agencies, etc. All that, yet no one put a gun to the American dolt's head and said sign here or else. They did that all by themselves and I (being one myself) do not believe we should let us off the hook for cleaning up the mess.
To imply that Texas can make these changes without impacting the education of the rest of the nation is to be completely ignorant of the way in which textbooks are produced.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
There are departures from fiction, and there are departures from fact. The geocentric model of the universe was not arrived at through modern skeptical scientific inquiry.
But this issue goes much deeper. It's not just that they are removing references to the progress America has made intellectually, socially and culturally, but they are replacing these references with inferences of their own, alleging that America is a Christian nation, recognizing the accomplishments of pro-slavery confederates and rationalizing McCarthyism as justified by some of the results.
However, it's not liberal bias to say that America is not a Christian nation. It simply isn't. There is not a single reference to the words "god", "Bible", "Jesus", "Christian", "religion" or "Church" anywhere in the Articles of the Constitution, and the single reference to religion in the Bill of Rights is the Establishment Clause which prohibits Congress from enacting any law concerning religious institutions, Christianity being one of them. This isn't a liberally-biased viewpoint. It is a fact. Just like evolution is a fact. We can debate how precisely either occurred, but that they are is a fact.
The problem with certain appeals to emotion, such as the "equal time" argument is that all opinions and arguments aren't equal. Some views, such as Intelligent Design, have zero scientific merit whatsoever, at least in the manner in which their proponents have presented them.
I know that we live in the Age of Entitlement, but no... not all opinions are equal. Some are substantiated in fact far better than others.
Studying stuff you know you will never use seems unappealing enough. Now students will understand that their studies are not only useless, but a load of half-truths made to fit whichever political agenda is in control.
Just memorize stuff long enough to regurgitate it on the exam, and if you can get away with it: cheat. I mean, why not? It's nothing but a lot of useless lies anyway, right?
Maybe, just maybe, subjects like math will not be overly politicized. But that stuff is all being offshored to the world's "best and brightest" i.e. cheapest.
This is exactly the kind of thinking and behavior that leads others to do things like, I don't know, threaten to secede. They assume the rest of the country knows absolutely nothing about them and is completely willing to disparage them for no reason, and it's usually due to willful ignorance like the kind you're displaying.
You've obviously never been to the south and have only seen it on television. Not everyone is a redneck or extreme conservative, the percentage of people who have guns is comparable to the rest of the nation, the foreclosure rate is comparable to the rest of the nation, we pay taxes like everyone else. Educational standards are similar to other parts of the nation, and yet it's true that there tend to be more dropouts, but it's not because the kids are stupid. It's because they're told their whole lives that they'll never be anything but dumb, failed rednecks by bigots like you. (That's right, YOU'RE the bigot here.) Try having that shoved at you, day in and day out, by the media, other Americans, even politicians. It certainly doesn't make most people want to go to school and be an overachiever just to prove everyone in the world wrong, because they're not going to recognize it anyway. Southerners will still be dumb old hillbillies who don't do anything for this country.
But you know, next time you think about some place where you imagine people ride on 4-wheelers all day with guns, who live on welfare and are willing to live with intolerance for those not like them, I'll point to this entire country, because you go an hour outside of any major metropolitan area in the U.S. and you can find people who are exactly the same. And you can come here, to the south, and see beautiful cities, people who work hard for nice things, people who vote based on how they feel, not how their preacher tells them, all those things. Because not everyone is the fucking same.
After all, this fact is probably one of the ones the Left has eliminated from the text books over the years.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
there were a giant wall separating texas from the rest of the usa
but as it is, what texas decides to do has an effect on me. thus, i have a right to say on what texas decides to do. if texas is going to unleash a bunch of propagandized holy warrior children into the usa, i want to clear my throat and say "no, texas, you don't get to whitewash history and zombify your children, because the influx of propagandized morons affects my life: these people vote, they make decisions, large and small, in loca, state and federal government, that affect my quality of life, and you will not drag me and my country down to third world status"
the lie is that state rights somehow have a superior advantage to federal rights. they only valid rights wall exists between the individual and society. the idea that state rights has some sort of validity is a false construct, that somehow the decisions a state makes is somehow superior or less superior, in terms of trouncing on indivudal rights, or upholding them, as compared to federal decisions
in other words: individual rights is the paramount issue, correct?
in that regard, how is it possible that what a state decides can somehow protect the individual, or trample on the individual, to a better or worse degree than a federal decision? on what logical basis is that possible?
state's rights ia c ontrived false construct, if you are truly motivated by the only morally and intellectually defensible cause: individual rights. state's rights cuts both ways. it is neither more for individual rights, or more against them. its a red herring to confuse the two concepts
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
If you stop to think about what the U.S. would be like without the former members of the Conderacy..what a fine place it would be! Given demographics from the 19th century etc. you'd have something that was a cross between Great Britain and Scandinavia. The U.S. today would likely be like Denmark on a massive scale, a social democracy that works and everyone is happy.
As a German I've wondered why Germany was able to move on, more or less, from devastating defeat to become a modern country. Whereas the states of the former Confederacy seem mired in the past, even though the American South was also devastated in losing their war. And both National Socialist Germany and the Confederacy could point to impressive military achievements (Rommel the Desert Fox, General Lee, etc). As an outsider I see these differences though:
1) In the American South, the former slaves (the raisin d'etre of the US Civil War) were present and part of life after the war. Whereas the countries Germany tired to conquer were far away from the lives of average Germans. It is probably an unfortunate part of human nature that when you have been oppressing someone, and that person is now free and you see him every day, that constant reminder brings guilt, which brings unhappiness, and eventually anger and resentment. Rather than contrition
2) Germany was actually lucky to not have a slave-based economy (despite the best efforts of the National Socialist regime and Albert Speer). The German blue and white collar workforce was able to easily build things that the world wanted. So, for Germans the war's end meant: keep working that drill press, keep making those precision optics. Whereas I think for the whites in the American South, they did not have many skills to fall back on when the black slaves were freed. If you have been primarily a slave watcher, when the workers are gone, you are pretty much hosed.
Longer term, for the American South to move on to modernity, I suspect a big part of the answer will be for Southerners to acquire a new identity to be proud about. Today I think only New Orleans has a culture that is desired and liked. I think many parts of the South have tried to rely on American football as an outlet for a drive for excellence, but that is really not enough. The American South really needs something about its culture, or something about the work they do, that would be "world class" enough to let them cut their ties with the baggage of hate and resentment from the Confederacy. Either that or the former Confederacy will prove to have been indigestible by the United States, and the U.S. will turn away from science, and it will indeed cease to be a great power. Which would be a travesty! The U.S. has so much potential, if only the crazy haters in the geographical basement could be reset somehow.
Gotta love the evil conservative hyperbole there.
No one is implying that all conservatives are evil. That's why it said this:
The alterations and fallacies made by these extremist conservatives are offensive to our communities and inaccurate of our nation's diverse history.
Frankly, if you've looked at the changes suggested, anyone in favor of these is an extremist. The best you could say is that they're not truly a conservative, as they're advocating wholesale revision to the point of making shit up. Here, TFA sums it up neatly:
The Texas recommendations... include adding language saying the country's Founding Fathers were guided by Christian principles and a new section on "the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s." That would include positive references to the Moral Majority, the National Rifle Association and the Contract with America, the congressional GOP manifesto from the 1990s.
The amendments to the state's curriculum standards also minimize Thomas Jefferson's role in world and U.S. history because he advocated the separation of church and state, and require that students learn about "the unintended consequences" of affirmative action and Title IX, the landmark federal law that bans gender discrimination in education programs and activities.
If you don't already see that for the steaming pile of bullshit it is, let me break it down for you:
the country's Founding Fathers were guided by Christian principles
"Lighthouses are more useful than churches." -- Ben Franklin.
Thomas Jefferson had some stronger words about the Christian faith in particular, but I couldn't find them offhand. No, these men were largely deists, making this an outright lie. The most charitable interpretation you could make is that they were guided by Christian principles, even if they weren't Christian, but that's obviously mistaken at best -- the Bible itself is clear about submitting to authority, that any Earthly authority (like, say, the British King) was placed there by God. No, they were guided largely by ideas floating around the world at the time, many dating back to the Greeks -- books like Plato's Republic, not the Holy Bible.
...a new section on "the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s." That would include positive references to the Moral Majority, the National Rifle Association and the Contract with America, the congressional GOP manifesto from the 1990s.
Hardly nonpartisan. I suppose you're going to tell me that the books are currently favorable to modern liberals? I'd say that this is pretty damning evidence of these being not just extremists, but conservative extremists.
The amendments to the state's curriculum standards also minimize Thomas Jefferson's role in world and U.S. history because he advocated the separation of church and state...
Can't have that, can we? It's only one of the pillars of the Great American Experiment, a prerequisite for religious freedom and expression. I very much doubt anyone writing this is a current member of the Church of England, are they? Then they owe their freedom to practice their current religion to Thomas Jefferson.
...and require that students learn about "the unintended consequences" of affirmative action and Title IX, the landmark federal law that bans gender discrimination in education programs and activities.
Are they really suggesting that banning gender discrimination was a bad idea? If you needed an example of why Yee said, "some Texas politicians may want to set their educational standards back 50 years," this is it.
I have to imagine that most conservatives would be ashamed to be associated with drivel like this. In light of that, I think the sentence you quoted is entirely true and warranted, as written:
The alterations and fallacies made by these extremist conservatives are offensive to our communities and inaccurate of our nation's diverse history.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Who calls it the War for Southern Independence? Everyone in the south knows it as the War of Northern Aggression :)
Lovely. Zero to 'racist' is 4.3 seconds. What a lovely rhetorical tool! Almost as good as tossing out "nazi" or "Hitler".
Let's not have an honest discussion...
Some background
Re: CRA
You:
Way to totally ignore the amendments to the CRA -- particularly those made during the late 80's and early 90's. It set silly and arbitrary targets lenders must make by location and race. CRA forced lenders to lend to uncreditworthy persons to satisfy the CRA.
Now, I'm not suggesting the CRA was the SINGLE cause -- but it certainly was a major contributor. As well as many other points of government involvement.
Do you REALLY want to discuss? Or just be an ignorant name-calling prat?
The areas covered by that legislation has better-than-average foreclosure rates now -- as in, fewer foreclosures. Not to mention that the legislation did not actually require banks to lend money to people without the ability to pay it back.
The Spanish/Mexican upper class enslaved native population of their conquered territory. But to be fair - the French and English in Canada and the US also took Native American slaves, as did many Native American tribes. That's the problem with history, if you care to look at all of it, there is always something that taken out of context can be used to support or demean someone's opinion. History, like science should be viewed critically not politically, if you wish to learn. Those who scrub the data are seeking to obtain an advantage over you to restrict your liberty for their own gain.
I don't disagree with your theory, but have you actually been in an elementary or middle school classroom in years? Budget cuts mean classrooms of 35 or so kids who don't have extracurricular activities and too much energy. Oh, plus unions means no firing of teachers. This all adds up to too little energy to put into teaching beyond the given curriculum for most teachers.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Very good points.
I'm often irritated by people who like to say "the founders were Christians so the USA must be a Christian nation". The founders did not have a completely homogeneous notion about the role religion in government in the first place, but I find it particularly errant when people talk about Thomas Jefferson's ideas about the USA being a Christian nation. Jefferson was a Christian and he was deeply absorbed in matters of faith--yes, he did publish his own edition of the Bible that was focused on the works and wisdom of Jesus Christ. These facts are evidenced by a large volume of his own writings.
The fact that he Thomas Jefferson was a Christian doesn't say ANYTHING about how he thought a government should work.
Jefferson's position on the role of any religion (Christian or otherwise) in government has been explicitly defined in his published writings. He knew that any institution of man is vulnerable to corruption and his objectivity allowed him to see that both governments and religions are institutions of man. He saw the influence of religion on government as a cancer to any free society. You can see this fact very clearly in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which was authored by Thomas Jefferson, that says it is not the right of the government to leverage religion and vice-versa. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Statute_of_Religious_Freedom
Jefferson, in particular, was a Christian and a founder who knew that intermingling of governments and religion was an abomination against both and he said so. To deny this and argue that the USA was founded as a Christian nation is to betray Jefferson's stated ideals and those of many other founders.
+= E
Seems to me California would have more important things to worry about.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
The reason that Texas has so much clout is that the State of Texas (or its school boards, under state supervision) actually BUYS the textbooks and issues them to the students throughout the state for use during the academic year. Perhaps if other states set similar standards and were similarly active in actually putting their money where their mouths are, they would be able to overcome the unique position that Texas finds itself in. It's one thing to bitch about how Texas chooses to make their educational decisions; it's quite another to actually put up or shut up when it comes to laying out actual state dollars to provide the children of the state with their textbooks.
Democrat Senator Leland Yee...
"Democrat" is a noun, not an adjective.
slap in the face to these hard working people who for the most part just want to be left the hell alone.
And collect checks from the Federal Government.
Most of the states from which you hear the most noise about "government encroachment" and "getting rid of Government" get more in Federal expenditures than they pay in taxes. Montana, from which you hear lots of whining, gets $1.47 back for every $1 they pay in taxes. Alaska gets $1.84; they're pigging out on Federal tax money. New Mexico is the biggest pig of all, at $2.03. And those "liberal" states? They pull their own weight. New York only gets back $0.79 for every dollar they pay in taxes. California gets even less, $0.78. Massachusetts gets $0.82.
Texas gets $0.94, so they're paying their way, but not by much.
The size of the subprime mortgage market is ~ $1.3 trillion.
The losses from the subprime mortgage currently stand at ~$850 billion and stand to grow to ~$1.5 trillion. No, not the losses to the economy as a result of the financial crisis, the write-downs on sub-prime mortgages.
Read that again. The losses in the market are currently at 65% of the size of the entire market. Do you think that >65% of subprime borrowers defaulted? And remember they've made some payments, and the house is worth something. And it's growing. It seems likely that at the end of the day the losses are going to be larger than the original market. That means that if every single sub prime mortgage holder failed to pay the first cent of their mortgage and if every single foreclosed sub-prime house had an actual value of $0, that won't explain all the eventual losses.
How then do you explain the losses? Zero-sum bets (bad ones). On $1.3 trillion of mortgages there were $4 trillion of zero-sum credit default swaps. When a few sub prime mortgages started to fail the amount of money somebody owed somebody else started to explode, and it had little to do with the homeowner.